Slashdot Mirror
Study Finds Linux 'Ready For Prime-time'
An anonymous reader tipped us to a Techworld article proclaiming Linux as the next big thing ... again. A study of IT directors, VPs and CIOs has concluded that within five years the open-source OS will be running more than half of all important business applications. From the article: "In short, open source, especially Linux, is being legitimized by the major enterprise vendors, and user executives are more than happy to believe them ... Microsoft's thawing toward Linux is now easier to understand when faced with such data - even as Windows continues to grow as the other main server platform of choice."
Only there to promote Microsoft/Novell and Oracle. It's making a campaign in favour of our enemies disguised as a positive article.
"most large vendors remain tied to legacy cash-cow operating systems"
I wonder who they mean by cash-cow OS?
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Linux is ready for prime time when a user doesn't need an admin to use a preloaded computer. That's still nowhere in sight, and we're not getting closer either: Many distributions remove codecs and proprietary drivers, making a useful system even less available to mere users.
Once again, I have to ask, how well does it integrate with SharePoint?
SharePoint is going to me Microsoft's collaboration tool of choice and not only does Linux not play with it, it doesn't have a competing offering.
Heck, this is going to affect OS X as well.
(And I'm not saying SharePoint is the answer, but a lot of CIO's seem to think so. For whatever that's worth.)
The opposite of progress is congress
Oh thank God for that! I was about to ditch Linux after 10 years of being utterly Microsoft free.
But with the blessing of these well informed and important pundits I feel the future is brighter
already!
There's something slightly sad and laughable about people who switch their minds once something is
so bloody obvious it can't be ignored any longer. Next we'll have Bush saying the war in Iraq is lost
and it was a bad idea in the first place - and everyone will applaud him for his incisive wisdom.
Why are those with the most influence always the last to know what is really going on in this world?
This isn't about Linux being ready for Joe Users Desktop or not, this is about Linux being used to run mission-critical businiess applications in the enterprise.
But who needs to even glance at the article if all one wants is to start a nice little flameware, he?
Linux gets a pool of lawyers and marketers.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
There never will be a "year of Linux", in the same way that there was no "year of Windows". It takes time, and it happens slowly. For me, 2006 meant the first time that I installed Linux on a laptop, and it was productive for me. Next year, some more people will discover it.
But in the very long term, I believe it's unstoppable.
that studies have found Linux ready for prime-time for 5 years now... *yawn*
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
Wow, that didn't take long!
The way this article is worded, it is obvious they are talking about servers. It will barely make a dent in MS's overall installed base. It might make a meaningful increase in Linux's total installed base, but I doubt it.
Only when the Linux developers and community take the desktop seriously and start to make Linux more accessable to Joe Average Luser will Linux gain an appreciable market share.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
I predict 2007 will be big for open source hardware.
Maybe in a paralell universe where everyone compiles kernels for breakfast and writes their own drivers.
Yea, it blows... the users away from Microsoft! =)
I'm not sure I understand why you see this as a problem? If you're looking at a production server environment, there's probably no need to run the very latest kernel - sure, if you're a desktop user trying to get the latest hardware to work under Linux, especially USB-based stuff, then you're probably upgrading to the kernels quite regularly.
The only thing I'm saying is that while this current development model maybe good for Linux it simply isn't good at all when looking at this from an admins point of view. What about kernel modules which basicly stop working after you upgraded the kernel?
But isn't this precisely the reason why a lot of organisations run both test/development environments and production environments? This is no different than testing a Windows update in a test environment before rolling it out into production - all part of the daily job of a sysadmin anyway! :-)
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
In my experience, 5 years is too far away to make for a worthwhile prediction. If it is that far away, we are just guessing. Far too much can happen in that time (economic downturn, anyone?)
Further, my last employer was a Windows shop. The infrastructure was designed around proprietary MS security and authentication. They don't want linux. They don't care what it runs or what it can do. If you don't have an MCSE, you aren't qualified to work there (>1600 IT employees for a company of ~9000). We made several server purchases from Dell that would have been better served by Sun (per application specs). That never happened and never will. Why having linux as an option will make a difference I have no idea.
The worst thing is that this is the norm in my experience. I use a Mac and have been called a zealot (though I use Win2k and Solaris as well) but those who use nothing other than Windows are just plain IT people. The true zealots are the Windows only users and they exist and are in control of the IT departments.
Surveys that ask if you would be willing to use something have little validity. Nearly everyone is willing to try something on a survey but in real life, the story is very different.
The Novell/Microsoft deal is not Microsoft "thawing toward Linux", it is Microsoft attempting to exploit the patent system to spread their FUD in new ways because all other efforts have been ineffective. It is becoming tiresome to see this lie perpetuated. I know the Novell/Microsoft press release claimed it was all about interoperability between Windows and Linux but that was just a red herring for those not familiar with Microsoft's business history, and it sounds a lot better to Novell's customers than "Novell management cashes out and does long-term harm to the company in exchange for a short term financial benefit".
Here is a simple question for anyone who believes the interoperability cover story, if Microsoft actually cared about interoperability why would they be paying Novell, or anyone else for that matter, hundreds of millions of dollars? Microsoft is the only organization in the world that has access to both complete Microsoft source code and Linux source code, if they wanted interoperability they would be in a better position than anyone else. Or, without spending a dime, they could simply release the specs which already exist internally for any number of proprietary non-standard pieces of software such as active directory protocols, smb/cifs protocols, exchange server, ntfs specs, wmv, etc etc. Rather than force everyone to reverse-engineer everything.
I don't doubt that Linux will experience significant growth over the next few years, but this particular article is just more phb-oriented magazine filler.
I don't wish to be rude but I think you're getting a little confused here.
The kernel is all about hardware abstraction from the operating system - backwards compatibility is all about having the right OS libraries in place in the right locations. With Windows, most of that is about having the right dlls in place to be able to run an older application on a newer Windows environment; with Linux, you either have static binaries with the required libraries built in or you compile your source against the libraries you already have in your Linux OS.
Sure, in the case of hardware drivers, then those that are external to the kernel need to compiled against the correct kernel header versions and that's an operation that can be sometimes fraught with problems.
The only reason you'd ever need to replace the kernel is for better hardware support or for specific features built into the kernel like firewalling, SMBFS, NFS, etc.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
I bet the series runs longer than Battlestar Galactica Redux.
I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
SharePoint is going to me Microsoft's collaboration tool of choice and not only does Linux not play with it, it doesn't have a competing offering.
Do you mean there's no open source competitive offering? Because there are products like Stoneware. That used to run on Linux, haven't checked up on it in a couple years but it offers web portal features, single sign-on, application framing. I'm not sure what else you'd want a competing product to do.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
The only reason you'd ever need to replace the kernel is for better hardware support or for specific features built into the kernel like firewalling, SMBFS, NFS, etc.
Or because some major flaws have found their way into the kernel resulting in the maintainers to strongly advice everyone to upgrade asap. As it has happened several times in the past now, even in the current (2.6) kernel tree. Now read back to "active development in the kernel" and you can see a big obstacle for mission critical systems.
It has been ready for the prime time for years, it is the work force that isn't ready. There's many IT support staff who can't administer Unix systems and therefore they can't administer Linux.
This is OT, but since I don't know where else to put it: Why do I have to load 500kb of css and js before the page even starts displaying? I know there was some article about pages loading for more than 4 seconds lose user interesst, well this page loads way longer (I visit the links in the RSS feed: http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/31/ 0430229&from=rss 15 seconds on my 7Mb connection).
Another funny thing is that the js consist mostly of comments...
Yes
You guys always do this; you talk about "Linux" but you are really talking about either the X Windows System or you're talking about the thousands of various software tools (such as all the GNU software) in the various distributions or you're talking about the various applications software packages that run on Linux and X, most of which also run on, for example, BSD and X.
Everybody here at Slashdot knows this already but, still, and probably forever, most people won't know this. So, is this OK? I don't think so. Linux is the heart but X is the blood, lungs, bones, muscle and skin. Let's get over being shy or ignorant about the importance of X, its uniqueness as a network display protocol, the renaissance in X development, the activity in X related projects like cairo, SVG, all things GL (OpenGL,XGL, AIXGL), Desktop environments based on X, etc..
Let's get over being shy about the importance of the UNIX component model and the valuable tool extensions that make this approach so much more useful than the monolithic approaches of other operating environments, such as rsync, scripting, et al.. And lastly, let's start talking about the absolute need for network computing. That's the computing paradigm of the present and the future. Let's talk about how so much of Linux, X, rsync (for example) and the applications are already so well suited for making use of and advancing that approach to software. Network computing is replacing the desktop as the next 'big thing', so let's start talking about that, why don't we? The game console manufacturers have recognized and accepted this, so why don't we accept that this is also true for applications?
So, yeah, I don't have any particular axe to grind against Microsoft employees (at least those whose names are not "Gates" or "Ballmer" at any rate. But that doesn't mean the I have to approve of MS policy, its corporate culture, and it most certainly doesn't require me to maintain a neutral attitude towards the corporation.
Given their hostility towards a social movement I hold dear, that would be silly, really.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
There's many IT support staff who can't administer Unix systems and therefore they can't administer Linux.
The problem is, they can't really administer MS-Windows boxes, either.
A basic understanding of computers would give any decent admin the ability to administer a Unix system (whether it's Linux, *BSD, OpenSolaris, or any of 'em). They might have to spend a week or two installing and learning their way around the system, and to grok the Unix Way, but they could do it.
Too many MS-Windows admins learn by rote, and not by concept. Many can set up DHCP, for instance, but not have a clue what DHCP really does, other than hand out IP addresses.
Oh, well. The same is true of some Linux people I know-- they couldn't handle an MS-Windows system, because they lack fundamentals.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Yes.
I remember trying RH some years ago, and could barely get it off the ground.
Then, last year, I was trying to set up Wordpress under Windows, and just couldn't get it going, so I stuck Ubuntu Linux on a box. It installed like a dream, and I had one problem with the wireless card (I bought a new one!), and then it was fine. I now do Wordpress development on it.
It's a lot, lot better. I believe it's moved from "hardcore geek" to "power user" level. You still get some setup problems, it's not as easy as grabbing a PC from Dell, and nor will it do certain things so easily (like games, DVD playback, well-known applications).
So, it's not ready for Joe User to set up... yet. However, Ubuntu is quite straightforward, though. Installing software and upgrades is probably easier than Windows.
Incidentally, I agree with what you say in general. There's a whole lot more than the technical merits of Linux to consider.
Download a live ISO (or get Ubuntu to send you a CD) and try it as a live CD. I'd be interested to hear how you get on.
Does that mean installing/uninstalling software under linux is now standardized, logical and quick, even for people who never used it before? Have you ever watched a new linux user try to install all their software onto a linux box without any help? Linux will not get any mainstream adoption until THAT need is addressed, and that's a promise.
Promise all you want. Linux is already mainstream.
We're talking server here. The article is talking server. The thing it overlooks is that Linux is *already* a major enterprise player.
And when it comes to installing / uninstalling enterprise server software, MS-Windows doesn't have a standard way of installing/uninstalling. The "putting the software where it goes" piece is covered: every major GNU/Linux distro has a standard way of installing and uninstalling. MS-Windows has a semi-standard way.
But the hard part isn't putting the software where it needs to go. The hard part is setting up Cisco Call Manager, or Oracle Financials, or Apache / IIS / whatever.
As far as the desktop is concerned, you lock it down (easy to do in Linux), and set up automatic updates from a central, controlled server. Roll out your updates when the users aren't logged on, and make a forced logout procedure so users can't be logged on unless they are scheduled to work at that time.
Users should never install their own software at work. That is the second-worst cause of computer failure in the workplace. (The number one cause is incompetent admins.)
With Linux, you don't even have to worry about viruses, so you don't have the hell that AV software brings.
But, to answer your post: Linux isn't like MS-Windows.
Thank God.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
2007 will be the year linux makes the definitive leap to the desktop! Just like in 2006, 2005, 2004, ...
OTOH, if I'd had a million dollars for everytime it became true, I'd be living under a bridge feasting out of the bins behind the restaurant.
Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
I actually did that, and Ubuntu was very nice; I wasn't even bothered by the brown. But there wasn't anything I could use. Oh, sure, I could surf the net. I could even type into a simple document. Of course, I couldn't get to a bunch of the files on my server. OO doesn't play nice with formatting or graphic elements in the .doc format. That's true the other way around, btw. I couldn't access my calendar or contacts, since I'm not aware of an app that reads those parts of an outlook file. I couldn't program my Pronto - that's a win executable only. I couldn't find a program to easily create a DVD from a string of VOBs, which I had created from my TiVo...which reminded me that I didn't have an extraction program for my TiVo written for Linux. I tried Gimp. Yikes. I really don't have the free time to re-learn a photoshop level app. And then there's the apps I use at work, none of which are even close to Linux apps (AutoCAD, AdvanSE, WoodWorks, RetainPro, RAM SBeam). I suppose I could try to play with Wine, but that's another whole set of stuff.
I think linux is ready for young power users who don't have an installed knowledge base of Windows utilities, and for older folks who are too likely to screw things up and don't really know Windows well enough to be comfortable with the standard apps. It may even be good for middle to large corporations where there's money to staff a real IT department that is Linux savvy. Everybody in the middle is, sadly, still better off with windows. Not because Linux isn't better, or doesn't equivalent applications, or isn't more secure, or isn't easier to maintain, but because of (1) the aggregate existing training in windows and (2) the installed knowledge base of applications. It would likely cost me between $100,000-$150,000 to switch my 3 person engineering shop to Linux. It's probably worth about $10,000. Until that ratio flips, we'll stay windows.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
TY. I'll consider your comment as "5-6 years have passed. It's worth taking the time to take a second look." I'm downloading as I type.
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
"Does that mean installing/uninstalling software under linux is now standardized, logical and quick, even for people who never used it before? Have you ever watched a new linux user try to install all their software onto a linux box without any help? Linux will not get any mainstream adoption until THAT need is addressed, and that's a promise"
.. Calling rpm with half a dosen switches (after reading a manual for 3 hours)"
Have you ever watched a new user installing Windows from scratch. If installing Windows is such a breeze then why are call centers such a growth industry. Since most of the standard apps come preistalled I doubt the new user would even have to install. For instance Linspire comes out of the box with Internet Suite, Email, Internet, instant messaging, Office Suite, Instant Messaging, Digital Music, Digital Photos, Wireless Capability, Plug and Play, Web Publishing. If that's not enough then there is an online update service. Just click and install. Off the top of my head SuSE, Mandrake, Debian all come with graphical installers. As do most of the rest I assume.
"but those are the reasons I put Mandrake 6.x, RH 7.0,7.1 and 7.2, suse x.x into a box and put the box under my bed and hardly bothered with them for the last 5 years"
Are you one of these Linux geeks who still live with their parents?
"I use the operating system to get things done, and I don't want to wrestle with it, I want it to do things intuitively"
You will be pleased to know that Redhat now comes with a graphical installer. As for getting things done, I put people down in front of a SuSE KDE/desktop and do know what, they can't tell the difference.
"unless getting RPM's to go to the right place and install the right way has gotten any simpler
I don't understand how you have to tell the RPM where to install. What took three hours to type RPM -Uvh.
"Long story short, I just wanted to get a basic functional web server together"
I also don't understand how you equate installing a web server with what the new user would ever want to do.
--
"do it to them before they do it to us", Sergeant Stan Jablonski
was I wonder. (Score:2), Troll
davecb5620@gmail.com
Your grasp on reality is truly enlightening.
I prefer Classic Slashdot.
One of the primary reasons that there aren't any "replacements" in the linux world (and limited compatibility with apps that play well with Microsoft's apps) all boils down to one thing: document formats. And who do we have to blame for that? The linux crowd who is constantly having to invest ungodly amounts of time reverse-engineering so that an alternative *might* work. Proprietary document formats ought to be illegal- no company should be able to exercise control over *my* data.
I misworded something so that my intent comes across the opposite from what was intended:
And who do we have to blame for that? The linux crowd who is constantly having to invest ungodly amounts of time reverse-engineering so that an alternative *might* work.
This should read:
And who do we have to blame for that? The linux crowd who is constantly having to invest ungodly amounts of time reverse-engineering so that an alternative *might* work, or the company making all this extra effort necessary because of the difficulty associated with proprietary document formats?
I think you misunderstand how the new development system works and why it was put in place.
In the past days everything was done in a stable and an unstable branch. The unstable branch had so many changes that once a freeze was in place it could take over a year to get close to stable and another year to get it up to mission critical standards. The whole time this was happening everyone was stuck on the previous stable kernel and falling farther behind on hardware support and features they needed. The largest problem with this is that about mid way through the dev cycle the old kernel would end up so far behind that people would start demanding changes to be back ported to the previous stable branch. Developers would then try and hack these features and drivers into the old version which would rather unsurprisingly destabilize that as they try and hack drivers into the old kernel while trying to back port as little of the needed infrastructure as possible. The result was TWO unstable kernels.
I recall a particularly nasty moment where my employer handed me a brand new server witch which to do an install on. The 2.4 driver I needed to power the RAID array wouldn't survive the install without crashing. 2.6. was out of the question because it just wasn't stable yet and also wouldn't run without crashing.
Now fast forward to the new system: each branch is frozen as soon as Linus is done with it. NO new features or drivers get added. Only bug fixes. Nasty bug in 2.6.14? update to 2.6.14.2. Now you know you have the SAME kernel only with the bug fix installed. it worked before? It should still work. Old kernels are maintained as far back as the new dev system was thought up.
Want that shiny new feature? They will probably have it stabilized in a month or so. Since that was one of only a few features added to the last dev branch it will take less time to debug. No more back porting. I have had much fewer problems with the new dev systems on both systems I need to be rock solid and systems I like to keep on the cutting edge(my PC).
The new system is easier to everyone involved and if you don't like it? 2.4 and 2.2, and 2.0 are still in bug fix mode so you can always go back to one of those.
Promise all you want. Linux is already mainstream.
:-)
We're talking server here. The article is talking server. The thing it overlooks is that Linux is *already* a major enterprise player.
I tried to emphasize that I was talking about the old and wondering if the new had improved upon it.
They called my post a troll..too bad. Anyhow, I like the way linux works, too, when it's working.
I have the ubuntu iso download at 31% now. One can hope.
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
Using ubuntu, I can pop in a USB disk/backup hard drive via usb and it immediately comes with up a nautilus window for browsing. Double clicking a tar/tar.gz archive brings up the archive manager and it's simipler to use than winzip because it doesn't have several prompts before anything can be done.
Can your grandma use XP, recieve a zip from you on a usb disk and drag the files to her desktop? Does she know how to get winzip? Install it? Configure it so it doesn't run it's own daemon and steal valuable memory? Click "I agree" every time it opens?
ubuntu sounds EASIER in this context.
We're trying to incorporate more Linux systems in our office, but as an accounting firm, almost everything is Windows only. From Quickbooks to the ProSystemFX suites of Engagement and Tax, we're pretty well stuck on Windows for the most part.
:) I think it's going to be good. My younger took about 3 minutes to look around, and the next thing I knew, she had changed her background and theming - I was really impressed. AAAAAaaanyway, back to the discussion.
That said, we've been working with Citrix on an experimental basis in order to add better remote functionality to our staff - and Linux boxes might wind up being the way to go on the client end. I know I've been using Ubuntu on my laptop exclusively for a year now, and a lot of our users have been coming up to me and asking what the deal is with the cube and whatnot (Beryl - check it out if you haven't yet, very very cool - http://www.beryl-project.org/), and I just use remote desktop to manage servers and once in a while run Windows apps if I really need to.
Also, and this is a total self-serving link, I just wrote about giving my kids Linux laptops. http://endcycle.blogspot.com/ - SO FAR, they love Edubuntu. We'll see how long that lasts, though.
--endcycle--
BS. I am using a default ubuntu install right now. I make a file called foo.deb
I then use nautilus to browse to it and double click on it. It opens "gdebi", a very nice simple package installer/deb reader GUI.
If I use a real deb, it gives me a nice button with a green checkmark labeled "Install Package". The first tab it gives me is the package description. The second tab is "details" listing the maintainers, version and size. The final tab gives a list of files installed.
'06 != now.
The fact that it's been recently improved doesn't change my point. Linux relies heavily on word of mouth advertising, which is slower to propagate. Don't expect mass Linux adoption until these kinds of issues have been polished out and have been for some time; the earlier flaws of a Linux Distro will haunt it for some time. That's why it's essential that these types of issues be polished ASAP for future Linux adoption.
And who do we have to blame for that?
You don't get it, do you? It doesn't matter who's to blame for that. The end user doesn't make decisions based on ideology. Almost nobody is going to forgive a product's deficiencies because it's not the manufacturer's fault - they'll just use another product.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
Let me add some more. Consider what the next big target market for Linux should be. Now, gamers are unlikely to be switching for the moment. Many power users will currently still want Windows specific applications, and most businesses will think of Windows specific software they want. For the moment, none of these markets are promising.
But how about users who just want basic functionallity? For them, surely almost any user friendly Linux distro would be astounding. The basic functionality you get out of, say, a standard Ubuntu install in terms of applications is vastly above that which you get from Windows, and with an amazing $0 price tag. That is an area where Linux can really take market share. Except for the catch; this is a market consisting primarily of non-power users. That means a reputation for user friendliness is absolutely and utterly vital. Linux needs that reputation ASAP, and there is still much polishing before it can be achieved.
When people ask me to recommend them a linux distro I generally ask them if they care how it works or if they just care that it works. If they just want it to work, I suggest Ubuntu. If they care how things work, I suggest Gentoo (and mentally add them to my short-term support schedule).
The reason I do this is because Ubuntu can be very frustrating for someone who actually wants to see how things work.
I've had a couple of people switch from Ubuntu to Gentoo after a few weeks, but never the other way around.
*sigh* back to work...
I agree that document formats need to be open. One of the best reasons is so that you can actually see what is in the file. The problem I have with closed formats is that I can't be sure exactly what is in the file.
It will also allow you to have a choice about which program you want to use. One of the reasons that MS Word has been able to dominate the word processing market is that you are able to save documents in MS Word format without having to actually use MS Word itself (many programs tout their ability to read and write MS Word files). How dominant would the MS Word format have become if the only way to read and write the files is with MS Word itself?
I use RTF for my word processing. Due to this, I have a choice of over 10 word processors (many free) to do my word processing. I don't have to be locked into a single program, and I can decide on how powerful a program I will use. Sometimes I just want a small, fast, and easy to use program.
For purposes of this post, I am going to ignore the implications of MS FUD in TFA, and specifically address whether or not (IMHO) Linux is ready for the desktop. Additionally, let me preface this by saying that I have used Linux as my sole desktop for PCs since 1994, but roughly two years ago switched to OS X on a Powerbook G4.
I recently tried to install Linux (specifically Ubuntu) on my Powerbook. To be fair, the live CD worked flawlessly and I was really impressed. Additionally, AirPort Extreme drivers are not working for PPC Linux, BUT I do not hold any distribution at fault for that because there are legal issues related to the open source version of the driver.
The installation went smoothly until I got to the Yaboot install - which failed. After considerable poking around, I read that there is a new bug in Yaboot when dealing with ATA drives. After several hours of manually editing the conf file - I finally figured out a manual workaround that solved the problem. However, I was frusturated by the whole process. Some time ago, I tried Yellow Dog (4.1, i think) - which installed flawlessly using Yaboot. This tells me that the new ATA bug was introduced recently. In the time since I first tried YD to the time I tried Ubuntu - I expected progress - not regression. While someone with time and experience can work through these problems, how can anyone expect Joe-six-pack to be impressed and not pissed when he tries it? One of the major Mac rags just ran an article about multi-desktop Macs and included mention of Linux. Each time someone with a Powerbook (or some other Mac with an ATA drive) attempts to install Ubuntu (or even openSuse for that matter), they will run across such bug and be soured.
The community as a whole needs a better way to deal with (read prevent) issues like the one I just encountered. While I understand how and why said bug occured, and how to work around it, someone trying to install Linux for the first time will run across it, get pissed, tell their friends Linux sucks, and get on with their lives. I firmly know that Linux has a better (read more stable) kernel than MS, and that all of the components necessary for Linux to be a prime candidate for the desktop are in place. Additionally, I believe that open-source is a better route. BUT, until the community gets its shit together and makes a distribution that works - Linux on the desktop will continue to be an uphill battle.
can your grandma
r entVersion\Run
Well, she's in heaven, I hope, and I suppose she can do that, if they allow windows in heaven.
"Ok, fine. Can the next person's granny do such a thing?"
I agree with your argument. MS Windows should have bundled winzip years ago. And there WAS a time when I had to be taught about winzip, leachy daemons, etc. You're right. If I had never done installer testing I wouldn't have known about hacking the registry and the hard disk to remove links to bogus autorun entries.
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\Cur
I have seen windows machines laden with more daemons than a west texas jackrabbit has ticks. That is a serious flaw in windows for lots of users, actually, and ms should have addressed it long ago.
Does she know how to get winzip?
You raise a good point. I actually am surprised that MS hasn't bundled winzip with the Windows.
And the analogy is fair, except that most compressed windows files are just zipped. They're usually not tarred, gzipped, tar.gz'd, pc6'd, (and heaven knows what else'd) etc. They're just zipped. It seems to me that linux should know how to unzip all of them without me downloading, same as I suggest for windows. Most people might not care about file compression schemes and they might prefer to have the details abstracted away. But you're saying that now it does. That's cool.
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
Who cares *why*? That's all just excuse-making. I don't care *why* Ubuntu can't play MP3 files, the point is that it can't-- and because of that I'm moving to something else. That's all there is to it.
The point of software development is to hide complexity from the user. I mean, if you let every software developer with an excuse to go home, then we'd still be punching machine-code on paper tape.
Besides, an Exchange replacement has only one cross-platform file format you're concerned with: "email." And, last I checked, a huge number of applications, both commercial and open source, seem to be just fine at passing email to each other.
Comment of the year
Hey, idjit, try using a little common sense before posting.
The Zune, and similar recent players, use this wonderful DRM-related bullshit called MTP. Libmtp is a Sourceforge project writing libraries to let Linux do this, and most MTP players are usable through it. However, the Zune implemented a lot of new APIs and calls that didn't exist before. Give them some time to reverse engineer it.
Yo.
First, we compare how you install a program in that paragon of user-friendlyness, Windows:
.dmg to the desktop .dmg
1- Find out what program you need (for, say, download illegal movies)
2- Google for it
3- Find a legitimate site to download it without spyware
4- Download the program to the desktop
5- Run it with admin privileges so it can wreak havoc on your system as it wants
6- Do the Next-Next-Finish dance
Now, let's compare it to the MacOS X way of doing:
1- Find out what program you need (for, say, download illegal movies)
2- Google for it
3- Find the site for downloading it (little risk of spyware)
4- Download the
5- Open the
6- Drag the program to the Applications folder
And then, let's compare it with the Debian/Ubuntu way:
1- Start Aptitude (from the System/Administration menu)
2- Search for the keywords
3- Choose between the search hits
4- Select them for installation
5- Press Apply.
Now, let's compare what to do to keep your programs up-to-date
On Windows:
1- Check regularly all web-sites for all programs you installed and see if there is a new version
2- Repeat steps 4 through 6
3- It is possible to have to uninstall the previous version before doing step 2. Most probably you will find it out too late, anyway.
On a Macintosh:
1- Check regularly all web-sites for all programs you installed and see if there is a new version
2- Repeat steps 4 through 6
3- There may still be some application files under "Library", but Mac users don't care.
On Ubuntu:
1- You just press a button and enter your password when prompted
As you see, Linux still has a very long way to beat the ease of use of Windows.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
Instead of such empty claims, you are always welcome to post list of problems/missing applications and functionality.
Unix in general is "system written by engineers for engineers". It is professional OS. It's not about some silly users pretending - but about things get done. I used to run Linux 100% of time. Many of my friends now run 100% Linux - and nobody's complaining. Or rather they complain "feature X of application Y sucks Z way" - no, not blank statements like yours. And the statement is also applicable to any OS, not just Linux. Ask me, I can provide you hundreds examples where Windows and its applications do not live up to their promises. Shall I then claim that Windows devels "don't get this"?
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
What? You mean Linux works? On computers?
Excuse me while I go write a news bulletin.
What's happened here is that MS "legitimized" Linux in the minds MS-sycophants and now they all want to jump on the bandwagon.
All Linux gurus out there get ready to capitalize (MS is certainly going to try).
Also, remember all your buddies who you finally got their Windows PCs working to where you can get a little peace? Get ready for another round of "why can't I (___fill in the blank___)"? when they switch to Linux.
1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
You just said it took three hours to figure out RPM. Installing new software is done also from the graphical installer as is managing the OS, as is configuring the desktop, all done by clicking boxes, just like Windows. You can even install your RPMs from the GUI as well.
'Firefox, for instance, still didnt work. Due to? Old kernel perhaps. That left me asking "how am I expected to upgrade this kernel?" and "is that potential headache of upgrading a kernel worth upgrading to firefox?"'
By what order of logic do you need to 'upgrade the kernel' to run firefox. Download and extract into
"Well, running a web server is actually very easy. Just run the thing. (after installing it
What need you of a 'guru', have you never heard of support contracts or the help forums or emailing the developers directly. And you will get an answer something I can attest to personally.
Again I can't undestand the difficulty, As a test I installed an apache web server locally (192.168.2.253). Install as the default configuration and copy the web files to
"learning the ins and outs of linux software management and kernel upgrades / patches didn't seem worth it."
I have never had to upgrade/patch the kernel in years of using Linux.What have you been doing this past twenty six years. And running a web server from your bedroom isn't considered wise as what happens when your mom comes in to vacuum the floor and unplugs the server.
davecb5620@gmail.com
Of course it can. You just have to endure a progress bar (Starting up... Time remaining: 6 years, 10 months, 25 days, 12 hours, 2 minutes) so that the decoding process begins the moment US Patent 5,579,430 and foreign counterparts expire.
The point of software development is to hide complexity from the user.How can software hide legal complexity from a user?
Besides, an Exchange replacement has only one cross-platform file format you're concerned with: "email."And calendar, right?
If the goal is to subscribe to updates and leave comments about intranet web pages, can't free MediaWiki software do that?
How can software hide legal complexity from a user?
Microsoft and Apple seem to manage it just fine. Again, you're making excuses.
And calendar, right?
Possibly. I did forget vcard format for exchanging contacts, but again, dozens of applications exchange that format all the time. I personally don't export calendars from one app into another, but I suppose it's possible a lot of other people do.
Comment of the year
With 3 AC fanboys replying I must have said something right.
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
RTF is just an alternate serialization of .doc. What does it add, except perhaps some parser robustness? Or by "RTF" do you refer to the version of RTF that corresponds to Microsoft Office 97 Word .doc?
Here's what happens when I right-click on a .deb in Kubuntu Edgy:
e bxj7.png
http://img503.imageshack.us/my.php?image=installd
I am so fucking sick of people complaining about how difficult things are to install in Linux. It always starts with something like:
"Well my friend said Slackware was good, but when I tried to install Apache..."
"Have you even TRIED to install something on Red Hat 6?"
"I downloaded this thing called a 'source tarball' and it couldn't even install it!"
"'Console'? Why do I have to speak computer-language? I thought you said Gentoo was new!"
For Christ's sake people, choose the distribution that is appropriate for your uses, and start sentences with "How do I" instead of "Linux needs to learn". If you're an idiot migrating from Windows, you should use Kubuntu, and not jump the bridge like Parent here when something isn't exactly the same.
Bill Gates isn't my enemy -- I don't (really) want to destroy him. Neither is Steve Ballmer.
<rant class="awful" title="Final Sanctimony Of 2006" style="presentation: preachy;">
Recognizing both of these guys as enemies is better than regarding them in any other way. Bill Gates' public history is littered with debris of the destruction he has caused to people who were his allies and partners: I would risk the safety of things I hold dear if I regarded him as anything other than an enemy. From statements in the public record, there is no doubt that if Steve Ballmer knew me personally, he would be threatening to "fucking kill" me.
Slashdot is full of people who want to emulate one or the other of these guys. They've got a word for people who see the world the way parent post describes it: suckers.
Enemies want to destroy each other.... I don't (really) want to destroy him.
Ah-hah! There is the problem; a simple but very basic mistake in how one should interpret reality.
It isn't about you all the time, you know. Do you really think that if you decided that Gretchen will be your lover, all of a sudden she will enthusiastically come to your bed? You actually have less say in who shall be your enemy than you do in who might become your lover. Failure to recognize that the other person has a lot to say about either relationship is not a good basis for one's view of the world.
No, Grasshopper, in this life you do not get to choose your enemies. You get to choose what principles will guide your behavior. You will then find that your enemies will choose you. If you are resourceful, careful, attentive, and very, very lucky, you may be able to choose your battles. But not your enemies; they will choose you.
Now enmity is another thing entirely. Avoid it, along with hatred, hostility, and all those associated feelings. Treat your enemies dispassionately, even in the midst of battle. For unless you are actually involved in hand to hand combat, there is no place for the intense concentration and focus, the tunnel vision and imperviousness to pain and injury, that are the hallmark of these emotions.
Invest your passionate energies in your friendships and loves; don't waste them on your enemies.
</rant>
Desiderata
Sure, it doesn't work for everyone. I'm no blind zealot. I had a need, it filled it, it does some of what I need elsewhere. I prefer the UNIX shell too.
Linux has been on over 65% of the Internet servers before M$ thought of being a server.
They still are the most stable for servers.
Right now, M$ Vista is as stable as Windows ME and has more holes in it than any other OS they have produced.
I can see many individuals that are not going to "upgrade?" to Vista, and either keep their XP or switch to something different.
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
That's just wrong. There's no reason why an equivalent of Exchange with address books, shared calendars, shared folders and mail can't be done with its own set of open standards. I'm not talking about any of it working with any Microsoft stuff. I'm talking about something that works with open source apps, or as a web application. Something that delivers similar business functionality.
I am going to ... address whether or not (IMHO) Linux is ready for the desktop. Additionally, let me preface this by saying that I have used Linux as my sole desktop for PCs since 1994...
Oh the irony. He's going to tell us that Linux isn't ready for the desktop, yet it's been on his desktop since 1994. It may not be ready for Aunt Tillie's desktop, but it certain has been ready for his for a dozen years.
The problem with stupid statements about Linux desktop readiness is that no one ever bothers to define was "desktop ready" means. Or if they do, it involves such a convoluted definition that only Windows can ever ever qualify (for some people, not even even Mac OSX is ready). Reading the parent's post, his definition seems to be "zero bugs in hardware drivers". But by that definition, Windows XP isn't ready for the desktop!
But what the fsck do I know, I don't even use Linux anymore. I've been using FreeBSD on my desktop since 2000.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Primetime is not ready for linux.
It's already there. Its Called Notes/Domino. Yes, the anti-Notes trolls can start complaining, but there is a reason that so many huge companies use it. It works. The fact that it is multi-platform doesn't hurt either.
In other news I hear that 2007 may be the "Year of LINUX on the Desktop"
When windows took over the world it could hardly be called "Ready For Prime-time". Now that it is ready, people forgot how awful it was. Feature set, stability or whatever properties of software you find important are just a part of equation, not the whole equation.
This is with ubuntu dapper. If anything qualifies as being 2006, it's a product released on 06-2006.
Windows ME and Windows XP operating systems ship with Compressed Folders, a utility that reads and writes PKZIP format archives. WinZip is not necessary. For other archive formats, 7-Zip comes as an exe download, and it doesn't have nag screens.
as I've said here several times before that the OSS community gets on the stick and starts writing things like OSS critical enterprise infrastructure software and vertical industry packages instead of 3D eye candy and media players for home user desktops.
You may have FUN writing the latter - but the former is what will put bread on the table - even if issued as OSS. The eye candy and media players will get installed in some distro and you won't make a dime supporting them. Supporting the infrastructure software or the vertical industry you understand will make you money.
Linux per se is fine. What's lacking is good testing of the desktops and the apps running on them by undermanned distro organizations - and OSS software that handles enterprise level requirements and vertical industries.
Five years ought to be just about enough time to pull this off - and preferably sooner if ESR's analysis earlier is correct that 2008 is the last window of opportunity before Microsoft locks down the corporate market.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Uh, yeah, shut your mouth.
Yes, the difference between Linux of five years ago and Linux today is like a Model T vs a Lamborghini.
Hell, even Red Hat 7.3 had KPackage which was in some ways better than the package management Fedora Core 5 uses. I rarely had to use RPM on my old Red Hat. Synaptic on my current Ubuntu is easy. Nowadays, setting up your repositories is the hardest thing you'll do concerning software installation. That still isn't as automated as it should be.
The ONLY problem Linux has today are idiot distro organizations who don't test their install and software update systems properly, leaving stupid bugs in them to bite the unwary new user. And of course application quality varies widely, perhaps more so than on Windows (at least compared to Windows commercial software if not to Windows shareware and freeware, much of which is also crap.)
Aside from a couple minor things one would class as "annoyances" (an odd and not apparently harmful "server overload" message that pops up when the system is heavily stressed by multimedia, and a couple desktop crashes apparently caused by the wallpaper changer), my Kubuntu 6.06 works fine and is easy to install software on (as long as the software is provided via the Synaptic or Adept package managers - or the third party software install procedure wasn't designed by an idiot.) There ARE things that could be substantially improved for end user usability, of course - but that's true on Windows as well.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Responding to "Flamebait" makes me as dumb as you, but...
Look, stupid, it has nothing to do with "Linux developers". It has to do with a monopoly called Microsoft and it's legal contract entanglements preventing hardware companies from supplying Linux on OEM machines and hardware developers from providing cheap or free drivers for Linux. It also has to do with corporate management that doesn't understand the OSS development and distribution model. They're learning but it will take some years yet.
I'll grant you that there are "too many" distros (in some sense), most of which are irrelevant to the uptake of Linux in any event for that very reason, and that OSS developers seem enamored with eye candy and multimedia projects (not that there's anything wrong with developing either) instead of making a buck developing and supporting critical enterprise infrastructure software and vertical industry packages, but this has nothing to do with Linux developers per se.
Windows was around for more years than Linux - and more importantly, based on DOS which had another ten years of commercial developer support - which is why there are more apps on Windows than Linux. (UNIX for the first ten or fifteen years was server only, so it doesn't count in the desktop sweepstakes.) Also, the business model of support vs software sales is a newer model that scares a lot of people who only want to make money from software development.
Linux developers know perfectly well that Linux needs more and better apps and certainly more hardware drivers.
Both will be forthcoming - which is the point of TFA.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
"I guess I'm just too stupid to use Linux."
Self-awareness is a wonderful thing to see. I congratulate you.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Sometimes it can be proven that the only efficient algorithm to perform a given task is the one that happens to be subject to a patent. Independent invention is no defense.
That's the upside... the downside is the "upgrade surprise" - while Linux is for the most part good at avoiding regression errors, they happen. Also (while not a problem for skilled users) UIs change at times. Yes, I know you can technically pin packages, have test systems etc. and I do feel that it's a better system than Windows - just saying that having a bunch of packages "behind your back" isn't perfect either.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
I could have said "sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade", but I guess yours is somewhat simpler (but updates less stuff)
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
By RTF I'm referring to the document interchange format created by Microsoft to deal with problems in translating documents from one format to another, This includes taking a document from one version of MS Word to another.
I don't know which version of MS Word the format correspondes to, but it allows for most of the features that I need for my writing and has retained compatibility for basic formatting. Over the years it has become the closest thing to a universal word processing format, although the OpenDocument format has a great deal of potential to take its place.
I've looked at the coding used for RTF and it shares some similarities with HTML but it is more appropriate for word processing since it doesn't have the formatting limitations of HTML (which have been addressed by the introduction of Cascading Style Sheets). As I said previously, I can take an RTF document and open it in a text editor to see exactly what is in the document. This can avoid unpleasant surprises.
As far as what RTF adds as far as advantages, I can mention a few (although some may be obvious):
As a sidebar, the above relates to MP3 for digital music. There may be better compressed formats for audio music, but only MP3 can be used on all compressed audio players.
Sorry to go on a bit, thanks for reading.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! at first i didnt realise this article was a spoof!! whew! excellent!!
You can't "have LITERALLY fallen into" an "emotion trap".
I mean, it's not like someone dug an emotion trap out in the woods, and disguised it with sticks and grass, and Maxo-Texas fell into it during a recent perambulation.
Or is that what you really mean?
Note that the word "war" doesn't mean what it used to mean, i.e., armed conflict between governments.
It acquired a larger meaning when LBJ started his "War on Poverty".
We now have a "war" on drugs, a "war" on terrorism, a "war" on copyright violators, a "war" on spammers and phishers, a "war" on this, a "war" on that, and a "war" on the other, some of which involve violence, others that don't.
(In fact, I'm still waiting for somebody to declare a "war" on violence.)
So the definition "war" (or, at least, the usage of the word) has been watered down in the last 40 years.
I see nothing wrong with discussing a "war" between Linux and Microsoft.
(I recently trained in a Linux terrorist training camp, and have infiltrated at least two Microsoft terrorist training camps.
Geeks with guns.
A frightening image.)
Disclaimer to the NSA/CIA/FBI/whatever: The above is a joke.
I never trained in nor infiltrated any terrorist training camp, Linux, Microsoft, or otherwise, so please don't arrest me and send me to Gitmo.
BRB, I hear helicoptors.
On, shi
Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
The only thing keeping me from switching to Linux is Adobe apps. I needs my Flash IDE, Flex Builder 2, Illustrator, and I'm sorry but The Gimp isn't Photoshop. But oh how I wish I could switch to CentOS.